Mayflower District Court
#spencerpootis15-v-ridgevilleborn
This is the start of #spencerpootis15-v-ridgevilleborn channel.
krabzatonin ᴏᴍ 2024-12-19 03:13 p.m. CASE INFORMATION**
IN THE MAYFLOWER DISTRICT COURT FOR CLARK COUNTY
---
spencerpootis15 v. RidgevilleBorn
Trial Type: Civil
Judge Assigned:
Yes
---
UPCOMING COURT DATES
```
Complaint -- spencerpootis15
Defendant -- Ridgev...
# CV-0077-24 [spencerpootis15 v. RidgevilleBorn](https://trello.com/c/4gTZVup8/351-spencerpootis15-v-ridgevilleborn)
---
---
```
Complaint -- spencerpootis15
Defendant -- Ridgev...
Labels
Civilkrabz pinned a message to this channel.2025-06-21 09:08 p.m.
krabzatonin ᴏᴍ 2024-12-19 03:13 p.m.@nauvelty has been added as the counsel of record for Plaintiff
krabzatonin ᴏᴍ 2024-12-19 03:14 p.m.
your client seems to not be in this server
nauvelty 2024-12-19 03:14 p.m.
will tell him to join @krabz
nauvelty 2024-12-19 04:33 p.m.
but in advance for his honour @Richo , i'll have reduced activity for the next two weeks since ill be in canada with my family: simultaneously ill have to study for my gcse mocks
nauvelty 2024-12-19 04:34 p.m.
i will attempt to respond to the court promptly but as a forewarning expect a delay in filing
Richo 2024-12-19 05:02 p.m.
Yes no worries
krabzatonin ᴏᴍyour client seems to not be in this server
nauvelty 2024-12-21 08:43 a.m.
client is now in the server btw @goodness gracious
nauvelty 2024-12-21 08:43 a.m.
forgot to mention yesterday
krabzatonin ᴏᴍ 2024-12-21 10:05 a.m.
Ok added
Arthur 2024-12-21 10:57 a.m.
Hello.
Arthur 2024-12-21 10:58 a.m.@nauvelty Will you be asking for a summons?
nauvelty 2024-12-21 11:46 a.m.
yes drafting it up as we speak
nauvelty 2024-12-21 11:52 a.m.
filed, sending it as a google drive rn:
nauvelty 2024-12-21 11:55 a.m.
cc: @Richo @krabz
krabzatonin ᴏᴍ 2024-12-21 11:57 a.m.
Will wait for richo’s approval before sending
nauvelty 2024-12-21 11:58 a.m.
krabzatonin ᴏᴍ 2024-12-21 11:58 a.m.@Solicitor General's Office this seems to mention official capacity
krabzatonin ᴏᴍnauvelty 2024-12-21 11:59 a.m.
mb: i discussed it with the doj in arbitration & i told them it was not official because it was unconstitutional
nauvelty 2024-12-21 11:59 a.m.
i forgot to change it in the complaint tho
krabzatonin ᴏᴍ 2024-12-21 11:59 a.m.
Oh ok
Richo 2024-12-22 11:50 a.m.
Yes send
Richo 2024-12-22 11:51 a.m.@krabz @nauvelty
krabzatonin ᴏᴍ 2024-12-22 01:59 p.m.
OKAY
RichoYes send
krabzatonin ᴏᴍ 2024-12-22 02:58 p.m.@Born has been added to the channel and may indicate their presence by responding to this message.
CC:@nauvelty @Richo
Born 2024-12-22 02:58 p.m.
Present
krabzatonin ᴏᴍ 2024-12-22 02:58 p.m.
actually
krabzatonin ᴏᴍ 2024-12-22 02:58 p.m.@nauvelty can you re-do the numbering on your CC
krabzatonin ᴏᴍ 2024-12-22 02:59 p.m. 
krabzatonin ᴏᴍnauvelty 2024-12-22 02:59 p.m.
ye ws gonna do that today
krabzatonin ᴏᴍ 2024-12-22 02:59 p.m.
okay thanks
krabzatonin ᴏᴍ 2024-12-22 03:00 p.m.
ping here when submitted
nauvelty 2024-12-22 03:24 p.m.@krabz amended complaint filed & will submit google drive form for convenience here
nauvelty 2024-12-22 03:25 p.m.
cc: @Richo
krabzatonin ᴏᴍ 2024-12-22 10:29 p.m.@ryan has been added
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-22 10:38 p.m.
hi
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-22 10:39 p.m.@Richo we're going to file an mtd and we'd like to toll the response timer until that is decided
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-22 10:39 p.m.
if I am lucky it will be filed tonight, if not today by EOD tomorrow
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-22 10:39 p.m.
cc: @nauvelty
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-23 06:02 p.m.
Pinged the two wrong person
HolyRomanRyanHolyRomanRyan 2024-12-23 06:02 p.m.@nauvelty @Richo apologies i am stupid
HolyRomanRyannauvelty 2024-12-23 06:03 p.m.
no worries LOL: will be filing a response tomorrow
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-23 06:03 p.m.
Perf just wanted to make sure u saw it
nauvelty 2024-12-23 06:04 p.m.
nauvelty 2024-12-25 09:54 a.m.
filed, google drive form for convenience is linked: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1b_Y45KOmnk7hqSLNHC6yV3nGfclKEQXk/view?usp=sharing
cc:@ryan @Richo
cc:
nauvelty 2024-12-25 09:55 a.m.
also merry christmas
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-26 07:14 p.m.@Richo hi this exists
HolyRomanRyanRicho 2024-12-26 07:16 p.m.
Hi do not contact me regarding my cases outside of this court chat
RichoHi do not contact me regarding my cases outside of this court chat
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-26 07:18 p.m.
Hi please try to expediently respond to the case channel so we aren't left wondering if the judge is going to actually dispose of this case
HolyRomanRyanHolyRomanRyan 2024-12-26 07:19 p.m.
You've yet to respond to this or acknowledge our motion at all.
HolyRomanRyanHi please try to expediently respond to the case channel so we aren't left wondering if the judge is going to actually dispose of this case
Richo 2024-12-26 07:34 p.m.
No
RichoNo
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-26 08:11 p.m.
Then the contact will be continuing until your honor can decide he wants to utilize the full capacity of his brain
HolyRomanRyanThen the contact will be continuing until your honor can decide he wants to utilize the full capacity of his brain
Richo 2024-12-26 08:14 p.m.
You have until midnight EST to retracting this statement
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-26 08:14 p.m.
Are you going to respond to any of the prior-to Christmas statements?
Richo 2024-12-26 08:15 p.m.
3 hours and 45 mins
RichoYou have until midnight EST to retracting this statement
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-26 09:03 p.m.
I apologize and retract the statement. I was out of line and I promised to be more respectful to the Court in the future.
HolyRomanRyanI apologize and retract the statement. I was out of line and I promised to be more respectful to the Court in the future.
Richo 2024-12-26 09:20 p.m.
As I thought
Richo 2024-12-26 09:20 p.m.
Familiarize yourself with the chamber-information rules
RichoAs I thought
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-26 09:22 p.m.
Now do you have an estimation of when we can expect consideration of the motion?
HolyRomanRyanNow do you have an estimation of when we can expect consideration of the motion?
Richo 2024-12-27 10:57 a.m.
Have you familiarized yourself with the chamber rules?
RichoHave you familiarized yourself with the chamber rules?
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 11:21 a.m.
I have, and as I understand the rules none of them preclude me from simply asking about the timing of the motion. I am not asking anything unreasonable, nor have I done so in a disrespectful tone. I am merely asking when we can expect you to rule on, or acknowledge our motion. As it stands you have yet to even say that it would be considered. This motion is integral to our defense strategy and how we'll proceed in responding to the civil complaint, so it's an extremely important issue.
The rules of judicial ethics require you to dispose promptly of the business in front of you, if you are unable to do so, we understand, but we'd request recusal, so this matter doesn't sit for two weeks.
The rules of judicial ethics require you to dispose promptly of the business in front of you, if you are unable to do so, we understand, but we'd request recusal, so this matter doesn't sit for two weeks.
HolyRomanRyanI have, and as I understand the rules none of them preclude me from simply asking about the timing of the motion. I am not asking anything unreasonable, nor have I done so in a dis...
Richo 2024-12-27 11:22 a.m.
Did you familiarize yourself with the chamber rules or not?
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 11:24 a.m.
I informed your honor that I had, those were the first two words of my statement, I apologize if it was not clear.
Arthur 2024-12-27 12:50 p.m.
Hello. @ryan
Arthur 2024-12-27 01:01 p.m.
Helol.
ArthurHelol.
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 02:13 p.m.
Hello
Arthur 2024-12-27 04:36 p.m.@ryan I have a few questions
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 04:37 p.m.
hi
Arthur 2024-12-27 04:38 p.m.
The Pl.'s complaint alleges death resulting from the Def's actions. Are you disputing that the Plaintiff's death does not constitute "concrete injury" or are you arguing that the Def's actions does not legally establish duty, breach or causation? @ryan
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 04:38 p.m.
Please do not tell me you're adjudicating this motion?
Arthur 2024-12-27 04:38 p.m.@Richo
Arthur 2024-12-27 04:38 p.m.
Will ask the questions then.
Arthur 2024-12-27 04:38 p.m.
Since you have a problem with that.
Richo 2024-12-27 04:39 p.m.
Proceed, you already have the notes of what needs to be found out here @Arthur
Richo 2024-12-27 04:41 p.m.
My law clerk is assisting the court by gathering relevant information which is entirely appropriate. I will be adjucating on this matter as I always have.
ArthurThe Pl.'s complaint alleges death resulting from the Def's actions. Are you disputing that the Plaintiff's death does not constitute "concrete injury" or are you arguing that the D...
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 04:45 p.m.
If you'll read the motion properly, I think it touches on your question. The crux of the motion is that the Plaintiff has not alleged facts sufficient to warrant standing to sue, constitutional significance, prudential standing under a normal interpretation of the statute, or facts sufficient to warrant a claim of wrongful death. All of this stems from the claim that the facts do not support a cognizable constitutional claim.
RichoMy law clerk is assisting the court by gathering relevant information which is entirely appropriate. I will be adjucating on this matter as I always have.
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 04:46 p.m.
I understand that, but you must understand that from my perspective it seemed the law clerk was about to dispose of this matter, which is something unfair to my client.
Richo 2024-12-27 04:48 p.m.
The clerk has never disposed of a matter without my authority
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 04:48 p.m.
I understand completely now, I merely wanted to clarify that this was not the case.
HolyRomanRyanI understand that, but you must understand that from my perspective it seemed the law clerk was about to dispose of this matter, which is something unfair to my client.
Arthur 2024-12-27 04:54 p.m.
I was asking a question. Nowhere did I indicate as such.
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 04:55 p.m.
And as we said the misunderstanding was cleared up. Do you have any other questions relating to the motion, so that we might dispose of it promptly and not waste time on moot issues?
Arthur 2024-12-27 04:55 p.m.
The issue wasn't moot until you answered my question.
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 04:55 p.m.
And then I did, and your honor clarified.
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 04:56 p.m.
And then I explained from my perspective and offered an answer to your question.
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 04:57 p.m.
Are there any residuals to take care of, or can we move on?
Arthur 2024-12-27 04:59 p.m.@nauvelty
ArthurHolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 05:01 p.m.
Ma'am, I feel highly disrespected based on your not responding to my question.
Arthur 2024-12-27 05:01 p.m.
I am a sir.
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 05:01 p.m.
Apologies, sir.
Arthur 2024-12-27 05:01 p.m.
And I'm re-reading your complaint.
Arthur 2024-12-27 05:01 p.m.
You say I've missed it but I simply don't see it in there.
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 05:01 p.m.
I did not file a complaint.
Arthur 2024-12-27 05:01 p.m.
MtD*
ArthurYou say I've missed it but I simply don't see it in there.
nauvelty 2024-12-27 05:02 p.m.
no there was a part on concrete injury from his mtd
nauvelty 2024-12-27 05:02 p.m.
i remember
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 05:02 p.m.
I believe that that question is based on a misreading of the motion.
nauveltyno there was a part on concrete injury from his mtd
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 05:02 p.m.
I'm not denying that, but it all stems from the lack of constitutional injury
Arthur 2024-12-27 05:02 p.m.
Death is not injury in your view?
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 05:03 p.m.
Not if it is reasonable use of force, which the complaint alleges it is not.
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 05:03 p.m.
Any officer may use lethal force and cause no constitutional injury.
Arthur 2024-12-27 05:03 p.m.@nauvelty Do you contest that?
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 05:03 p.m.
I don't think that's contestable, sir.
Arthur 2024-12-27 05:03 p.m.
Let him speak.
Arthurnauvelty 2024-12-27 05:04 p.m.
yes, the lethal force was excessive and unnecessary
nauvelty 2024-12-27 05:05 p.m.
do you want me to elaborate further
Arthur 2024-12-27 05:05 p.m.
Yes please.
nauvelty 2024-12-27 05:06 p.m.
well the complaint, under the cause of action, had challenged the reasonableness of the defendants use of lethal force as was outlined in tennesse v. garner: the defendants use of lethal force was a clear constitutional injury towards the plaintiff
nauvelty 2024-12-27 05:06 p.m.
if it didnt i'd like to clear that up now
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 05:07 p.m.
If I may
nauvelty 2024-12-27 05:07 p.m.
and obviously we all know death is the most ultimate and concrete injury
Arthur 2024-12-27 05:07 p.m.
Before we continue, do you both have any issue with me asking questions. @nauvelty @ryan
Arthur 2024-12-27 05:07 p.m.
Alternatively, we can wait for Hon. Richo.
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 05:08 p.m.
No, as long as you understand the premise of the motions and the associated rules of proceedure, this is fine.
Arthur 2024-12-27 05:08 p.m.@nauvelty
Arthurnauvelty 2024-12-27 05:09 p.m.
i dont mind waiting
Arthur 2024-12-27 05:09 p.m.
Respectfully, that is not what I asked
Arthur 2024-12-27 05:09 p.m.
We can wait for Hon Richo in that case.
nauvelty 2024-12-27 05:09 p.m.
essentially i don't really care, so i don't have any issue with you asking questions
nauvelty 2024-12-27 05:09 p.m.
nor do i have an issue with waiting for his liege richocaldwell
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 05:10 p.m.
Seems superfluous.
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 05:10 p.m.@Arthur Will your asking questions speed up disposition of the motion?
Arthur 2024-12-27 05:11 p.m.
Perhaps, if I get the answers I'm looking for. But due to your * communication outside of these channels I am reluctant to step in anymore.(edited)
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 05:11 p.m.
I have not committed one instance of ex parte communications.
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 05:11 p.m.
If you could explain what you believe that means and where, I am more than able to explain why that is not the case.
UserMessage could not be loaded.
Arthur 2024-12-27 05:13 p.m.
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 05:13 p.m.
That is not ex parte communication, I am frankly appalled that you believe it is.
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 05:14 p.m.
Ex parte communication covers communications to the judge. I am able to comment on your performance or the merits of this case in ANY channel I choose as long as it is not directed at the judge.
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 05:14 p.m.
If you'd so desire, I can start pinging @nauvelty everytime I mention this case.
ArthurClick to see attachment.
nauvelty 2024-12-27 05:14 p.m.
thats not ex parte communication
nauvelty 2024-12-27 05:14 p.m.
like holyroman said
nauvelty 2024-12-27 05:15 p.m.
i dont even know why we're having this conversation of ex parte communication right now
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 05:15 p.m.
Yea let's wait for the judge. I have, with all due respect, lost confidence in the ability for you to fairly and reasonable adjudicate this motion.
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 05:15 p.m.@Arthur
HolyRomanRyanYea let's wait for the judge. I have, with all due respect, lost confidence in the ability for you to fairly and reasonable adjudicate this motion.
nauvelty 2024-12-27 05:18 p.m.
likewise
Richo 2024-12-27 05:18 p.m.
Hi do not ask for things to be expedited then, I'll handle when I'm free @Arthur
RichoHi do not ask for things to be expedited then, I'll handle when I'm free @Arthur
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 05:19 p.m.
I think that it is unreasonable to either subject us to a lower standard of disposition or slow disposition. If these are our two options, we'd frankly want this case to be reassigned.
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 05:20 p.m.
I do not mean any disrespect, this is simply advocation for my client, at this point
Richo 2024-12-27 05:20 p.m.
Its being slowed due to your preference of not wanting my clerk to assist, I am allowing that request
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 05:20 p.m.
I would ask that this still be expediently handled as per the requirements of the ethics code.
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 05:20 p.m.
As reasonably as possible for you, your honor
Richo 2024-12-27 05:20 p.m.
I will not put this case above standards to be expedited(edited)
Richo 2024-12-27 05:21 p.m.
It will be handled as any other normal case
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 05:21 p.m.
If i may, what standards?
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 05:21 p.m.
I am not requesting anything else.
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 05:21 p.m.
I am simply requesting proper adjudication which so requires prompt disposition of these matters.
Richo 2024-12-27 05:21 p.m.
This isn't an interrogation
Richo 2024-12-27 05:21 p.m.
I will get to this case when I can
Richo 2024-12-27 05:21 p.m.
Do not continue pestering me about it
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 05:21 p.m.
We'd ask for recusal then.
Richo 2024-12-27 05:21 p.m.
To the point where you're on the verge of contempt
RichoTo the point where you're on the verge of contempt
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 05:22 p.m.
If I may ask, which rule have I violated, so I know exactly what to avoid?
HolyRomanRyanWe'd ask for recusal then.
Richo 2024-12-27 05:22 p.m.
Denied
HolyRomanRyanIf I may ask, which rule have I violated, so I know exactly what to avoid?
Richo 2024-12-27 05:25 p.m.
The statement you made which was asked to be retracted
Richo 2024-12-27 05:26 p.m.
Now again, do not continue pestering the Courts for special privileges and wait until I review your motion.
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 05:26 p.m.
I retracted and apologized to this Court, I don't understand why that would put me close to contempt?
HolyRomanRyanI retracted and apologized to this Court, I don't understand why that would put me close to contempt?
Richo 2024-12-27 05:26 p.m.
The latter would have been a contempt hearing
Richo 2024-12-27 05:27 p.m.
End of discussion until I review the motion
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 05:27 p.m.
But I believe that violation of rules is fundementally moot. Is there another rule, so that I might not offend the nature of the court.
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 05:27 p.m.
Yes your honor
Arthur 2024-12-27 05:38 p.m.
OK
Richo 2024-12-27 06:04 p.m.@ryan
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 06:04 p.m.
I am here, your honor.
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 06:07 p.m.@Richo
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 06:50 p.m.@Richo I would like to bring to your attention and the attention of @nauvelty that a man claiming to be from your chambers has DM'd me with an 'important message.'
HolyRomanRyannauvelty 2024-12-27 06:50 p.m.
who
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 06:51 p.m.
One suhpea
HolyRomanRyanRicho 2024-12-27 06:51 p.m.
Does the man claiming to be from chambers happen to be Divine or myself?
Richo 2024-12-27 06:51 p.m.
Those are the only two
HolyRomanRyanOne suhpea
nauvelty 2024-12-27 06:51 p.m.
idk who he is
Arthur 2024-12-27 06:51 p.m.
Suhpea?
RichoDoes the man claiming to be from chambers happen to be Divine or myself?
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 06:51 p.m.
It does not, however, I think it is noteworthy.
Richo 2024-12-27 06:51 p.m.
Noted
Richo 2024-12-27 06:51 p.m.
Not relevant however
Arthur 2024-12-27 06:51 p.m.
I like subpoena's.
RichoNot relevant however
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 06:52 p.m.
I would think it is, but cool.
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 06:52 p.m.
May I ask what the Court's purpose in pinging me was?
Richo 2024-12-27 06:52 p.m.
Yes I am going over something, I'll continue it soon
HolyRomanRyan 2024-12-27 06:52 p.m.
Okay perfect
RichoYes I am going over something, I'll continue it soon
nauvelty 2024-12-30 02:48 p.m.@Richo
nauvelty 2025-01-02 11:49 a.m.@Richo may we get that ruling on the mtd soon
HolyRomanRyan 2025-01-02 06:51 p.m.
You've been served
nauveltyRicho 2025-01-03 11:24 a.m.
Yes, due to the request of the defendant not wanting the Clerk involved here it may take a while until I fully review without the support of Court staff
RichoYes, due to the request of the defendant not wanting the Clerk involved here it may take a while until I fully review without the support of Court staff
HolyRomanRyan 2025-01-03 02:26 p.m.
See above.
HolyRomanRyanRicho 2025-01-03 02:49 p.m.
Motion denied, full ruling with details to come soon.
RichoMotion denied, full ruling with details to come soon.
HolyRomanRyan 2025-01-03 03:54 p.m.
How soon? We are fully intent on appealing the decision.
nauvelty 2025-01-05 04:44 a.m.@Richo your majesty can we get a full ruling today or tomorrow?
nauveltyHolyRomanRyan 2025-01-07 02:57 p.m.@Richo
HolyRomanRyan 2025-01-07 05:10 p.m.@Richo if you're going LoA I request recusal/reassignment so we could, perhaps, get an actual ruling on this
HolyRomanRyanRicho 2025-01-07 05:12 p.m.
See chamber-information , not full LOA.
Richo 2025-01-07 05:12 p.m.
I will be handling remaining cases
HolyRomanRyan 2025-01-07 05:13 p.m.
As long as you intend to give a ruling sure
HolyRomanRyan 2025-01-07 05:13 p.m.
We're 15 days into the motion
nauvelty 2025-01-11 03:00 p.m.@Richo your honour can we PLEASE get a full ruling on the motion to dismiss and move on in the proceedings(edited)
HolyRomanRyan 2025-01-11 11:39 p.m.@nauvelty hate to say it but i am dragging this to the SC is jhe rules...ur not moviung to proceedings ever kdi.
nauvelty 2025-01-12 05:02 a.m.@Richo if his honour doesnt have any time to preside over this case, the plaintiff suggests he recuse himself and have the case reassigned to another judge in another docket
nauveltyRicho 2025-01-12 07:55 a.m.
I've already made it clear I'm not recusing and my LOA is not fully.
RichoI've already made it clear I'm not recusing and my LOA is not fully.
nauvelty 2025-01-12 12:26 p.m.
then would his honour graciously expedite posting the ruling and so we can move on in the proceedings
Richo 2025-01-15 11:23 a.m.
Thank you for your patience, I'll have it re-assigned to speed things up
Richo 2025-01-15 11:23 a.m.
CC: @shah
shah 2025-01-15 11:33 a.m.
New judge @morale
shah 2025-01-15 11:33 a.m.
All parties of record
@nauvelty @ryan @goodness gracious @Born
HolyRomanRyanHolyRomanRyan 2025-01-15 01:30 p.m.@morale we'd ask you to reconsider the motion
nauvelty 2025-01-18 04:13 a.m.@morale
HolyRomanRyan 2025-01-20 03:08 p.m.@morale
HolyRomanRyan 2025-01-20 03:08 p.m.
this is getting worse than richo.
shah 2025-01-21 04:22 p.m.
you hated on divine... 
nauvelty 2025-01-22 01:00 p.m.
yeah, can we get this reassigned to another judge @shah
shah 2025-01-22 02:10 p.m.
ask clerk
shah 2025-01-22 02:10 p.m.
or chief judg
shahyou hated on divine...
HolyRomanRyan 2025-01-22 02:24 p.m.
Well he was slow actually
HolyRomanRyan 2025-01-22 02:25 p.m.
Lucas is slow physically
shah used /add
clerkFlow Bot2025-01-22 02:25 p.m. @shah has added @acerxtro to the case channel.
Case Modified
shah 2025-01-22 02:25 p.m.@acerxtro
HolyRomanRyan 2025-01-22 02:26 p.m.@acerxtro hey bby
acerxtro 2025-01-22 02:38 p.m.
hello
nauvelty 2025-01-22 05:29 p.m.
wallahi finally 
HolyRomanRyanHolyRomanRyan 2025-01-22 10:51 p.m.@acerxtro could we get a review on this
acerxtro 2025-01-22 10:51 p.m.
possibly
HolyRomanRyan 2025-01-22 10:52 p.m.
What would turn that possibility to a yes
HolyRomanRyanWhat would turn that possibility to a yes
acerxtro 2025-01-22 10:54 p.m.
let me take a glance at it
acerxtrolet me take a glance at it
HolyRomanRyan 2025-01-24 03:37 a.m.
How's the glance going?
acerxtro 2025-01-24 06:17 p.m.
sorry I am recusing due to COI w/ ridgevilleborn
acerxtro 2025-01-24 06:18 p.m.@ryan @nauvelty
nauvelty 2025-01-24 06:42 p.m.
Richo 2025-01-24 08:29 p.m.
You're back with me @ryan
Richo 2025-01-24 08:29 p.m.
HolyRomanRyan 2025-01-24 08:44 p.m.
oh my goodness
Arthur 2025-01-24 08:48 p.m.
Hello and welcome back @ryan
Arthur 2025-01-24 08:48 p.m.
Lets deal with this promptly!
Arthur 2025-01-24 08:48 p.m.@nauvelty
HolyRomanRyan 2025-01-24 11:11 p.m.
Once a ruling is out we'll appeal
RichoYou're back with me @ryan
goodness gracious 2025-01-25 06:23 a.m.
Arthur 2025-01-25 10:09 a.m.
OK. @ryan
UserMessage could not be loaded.
Richo 2025-01-25 12:44 p.m.
Richo 2025-01-25 12:44 p.m.@ryan
HolyRomanRyan 2025-01-25 03:56 p.m.
Notice of appeal 2day
HolyRomanRyan 2025-01-26 11:28 p.m.
well not really
HolyRomanRyan 2025-01-26 11:28 p.m.
probably tmr if i am being honest
nauvelty 2025-01-27 02:16 p.m.
i came i saw i came again 
nauvelty 2025-01-27 02:17 p.m.
wait wrong server
Arthur 2025-01-27 07:09 p.m.
Lets continue
HolyRomanRyan 2025-01-29 03:49 p.m.
PWC today!!
HolyRomanRyan 2025-01-29 03:49 p.m.
yipeee
HolyRomanRyan 2025-01-29 03:49 p.m.@nauvelty are u ready for the SC
HolyRomanRyan 2025-01-29 09:47 p.m.@nauvelty @Richo
HolyRomanRyanClick to see attachment.
Arthur 2025-02-03 05:36 p.m.
Ok but we're still continuing.
HolyRomanRyan 2025-02-03 05:59 p.m.
We're waiting on you
HolyRomanRyan 2025-02-03 05:59 p.m.
Unsure if you know this
nauvelty 2025-02-19 03:55 p.m.
sitting here for 16 days
Toby 2025-02-24 05:31 p.m.@Richo
nauvelty 2025-02-26 05:49 p.m.@Richo this is getting ridiculous
nauvelty 2025-02-27 03:48 p.m.
nauvelty 2025-03-03 04:52 p.m.@Richo
HolyRomanRyanClick to see attachment.
nauvelty 2025-03-03 04:53 p.m.
please im begging you
nauvelty 2025-03-03 04:53 p.m.
its ridiculous its taken a month for something to be done
HolyRomanRyan 2025-03-03 07:09 p.m.
Hey
HolyRomanRyan 2025-03-03 07:09 p.m.
/wave
nauvelty 2025-03-07 07:01 a.m.@Richo
HolyRomanRyan 2025-03-08 10:33 p.m.@Kezzera
HolyRomanRyan 2025-03-08 10:33 p.m.
hi
HolyRomanRyan 2025-03-08 10:33 p.m.
can we get a reassignment
HolyRomanRyan 2025-03-08 10:33 p.m.
this is insane
Kezzera 2025-03-08 11:06 p.m.
oh hell what happened here
Kezzeraoh hell what happened here
HolyRomanRyan 2025-03-09 06:04 p.m.
Richo has neglected us for 3 months
HolyRomanRyan 2025-03-09 06:04 p.m.
Could we get literally anyone else???
Kezzera 2025-03-09 07:07 p.m.
Marked
Kezzera 2025-03-09 08:09 p.m.@honkhonk This case should be reassigned
honkhonk 2025-03-09 08:21 p.m.
I shall be reassigning this momentarily
honkhonkI shall be reassigning this momentarily
nauvelty 2025-03-10 11:09 a.m.
pls do
honkhonk 2025-03-10 04:56 p.m.
I have assigned this case to the Honorable Judge Singhski.
cc:@singhski
cc:
honkhonk 2025-03-10 04:57 p.m. CASE INFORMATION**
IN THE MAYFLOWER DISTRICT COURT FOR CLARK COUNTY
---
spencerpootis15 v. RidgevilleBorn
Trial Type: Civil
Judge Assigned: RichoCornwall
Complaint Attached: Yes
---
UPCOMING COURT DATES
```
Complaint -- spencerpootis15
Defen...
---
---
```
Complaint -- spencerpootis15
Defen...
Labels
CivilHolyRomanRyan 2025-03-11 03:41 a.m.@singhski i withdraw as counsel
HolyRomanRyan 2025-03-11 03:41 a.m.
Defendant has been given instruction on how to proceed with SGO
singhski 2025-03-11 11:46 a.m.@nauvelty where are we with this?
singhski 2025-03-11 11:46 a.m.@ryan Who is replacing you?
singhski used /add
clerkFlow Bot2025-03-11 11:49 a.m. @singhski has added @nauvelty to the case channel.
Case Modified
singhski 2025-03-11 11:49 a.m.@nauvelty
singhskinauvelty 2025-03-11 11:51 a.m.
original counsel (HRR) filed a PWC after his mtd was denied; discovery has not yet occurwd
RichoClick to see attachment.
nauvelty 2025-03-11 11:55 a.m.
ruling is here ^^^
singhskiHolyRomanRyan 2025-03-11 11:58 a.m.@Nicklaus
singhski used /add
clerkFlow Bot2025-03-11 05:01 p.m. @singhski has added @Nicklaus to the case channel.
Case Modified
Nicklaus 2025-03-11 08:26 p.m.
he hit the officer and flung him into the air but NO lethal force was NOT objectively reasonable
Nicklaus 2025-03-11 08:29 p.m.
sorry for my outburst your honor
Nicklaus 2025-03-11 08:29 p.m.
we will have a responsive pleading soon(edited)
UserMessage could not be loaded.
Nicklaus 2025-03-13 05:27 p.m.
Nicklaus 2025-03-13 05:27 p.m.@nauvelty @singhski
nauveltynauvelty 2025-03-13 05:33 p.m.
unsure if defence counsel saw the amended complaint attached to the card: this issue was already resolved by the court
Nicklaus 2025-03-13 05:33 p.m.
the issue is not solved
nauvelty 2025-03-13 05:36 p.m.
nvm disregard i js saw what you're talking abt
nauvelty 2025-03-13 05:38 p.m.
regardless will be filing opposition to the motion in timely fashion
Nicklaus 2025-03-13 05:44 p.m.
u can submit an amended complaint instead of a opposition and then i could file an answer and then we could open discovery
Nicklaus 2025-03-13 05:44 p.m.
nauvelty 2025-03-13 05:45 p.m.
siggy say less
nauveltyregardless will be filing opposition to the motion in timely fashion
Nicklaus 2025-03-14 05:00 p.m.
hi
nauveltyregardless will be filing opposition to the motion in timely fashion
singhski 2025-03-15 04:26 a.m.
Hi!
singhskiHi!
nauvelty 2025-03-15 04:33 a.m.
hi sending in like 2 hours
nauvelty 2025-03-15 04:33 a.m.
im doing chem tuition
Nicklaus 2025-03-15 03:26 p.m.
for someone who was zippy to get this case on the move
Nicklaus 2025-03-15 03:26 p.m.
they sure arent reciprocating !
nauveltyhi sending in like 2 hours
singhski 2025-03-15 03:30 p.m.
Why are you doing charity with both your time and mine?
singhski 2025-03-15 03:31 p.m.
Are you the landlord of lateness?
singhski 2025-03-15 03:31 p.m.
Your watch must be running on generator
singhski 2025-03-15 03:32 p.m.
As far as I'm concerned this is not a night vigil o
Nicklaus 2025-03-15 07:51 p.m.@singhski we'd like a paperless order on the motion to strike until you have time to provide a paper opinion (if any)
Nicklaus 2025-03-15 07:51 p.m.
the time to file an opposition has come and gone
Nicklaus 2025-03-15 07:52 p.m.
he was even given fair opportunity to submit an amended complaint and not an opposition, but he did not
nauvelty 2025-03-16 04:52 a.m.@singhski @Nicklaus apologies, i thought id have time to send amended complaint yesterday BUT it was my sisters birthday so i had no time to send
UserMessage could not be loaded.
nauvelty 2025-03-16 04:53 a.m.
nauvelty 2025-03-16 04:53 a.m.
filed in <#1349633434955550771>
nauvelty 2025-03-16 04:54 a.m.
& google drive format: https://drive.google.com/file/d/11tbz4ZGTmo4ViPWe7IYYYdZCl6EAHKEw/view?usp=sharing
singhski 2025-03-16 08:55 a.m.@nauvelty I thought you were going to file opposition to the motion?
singhski 2025-03-16 08:57 a.m.
So now your eyes have seen what your mouth has caused.
singhski 2025-03-16 08:57 a.m.
Now you are seeing that pepper is not sugar.
singhskinauvelty 2025-03-16 08:59 a.m. 
nauvelty& google drive format: https://drive.google.com/file/d/11tbz4ZGTmo4ViPWe7IYYYdZCl6EAHKEw/view?usp=sharing
singhski 2025-03-16 09:00 a.m.
Although this is accepted since no responsive pleading was filed, @Nicklaus you have 7 days.
singhski 2025-03-16 09:02 a.m.
or rather 10 days
nauveltyClick to see attachment.
nauvelty 2025-03-16 09:02 a.m.
if we analyse the connotations of "siggy say less", the verb "say" conveys to the reader the intent for speech, while the noun "less" describes a lack of something. here, the writer, axlrod_x, aims to convey his intent to respond positively to what "nicklaus_s" has said, and thus telling him to "say less", suggesting his agreement in filing "an answer" in order to open discovery.
I hope I helped you with analyzing your screenshot! Send me more screenshots that you want analyzing for a Grade 9, GCSE analysis to help with your English Literature!
I hope I helped you with analyzing your screenshot! Send me more screenshots that you want analyzing for a Grade 9, GCSE analysis to help with your English Literature!
singhskior rather 10 days
singhski 2025-03-16 09:02 a.m.
Mayfl. R. Civ. P. 17(a)
UserMessage could not be loaded.
Nicklaus 2025-03-16 11:17 a.m.
Nicklaus 2025-03-16 11:17 a.m.@nauvelty @singhski
Nicklaus 2025-03-16 11:19 a.m.
we will have interrogatories once discovery opens
singhski 2025-03-16 02:51 p.m.
Cc: @nauvelty @Nicklaus
MINUTE ORDER ESTABLISHING PRETRIAL AND DISCOVERY TIMELINES
The pretrial has officially started and will end onMarch 26, 2025 at 12:00 p.m. , pretrial motions must be filed in accordance with this order barring extension for a cause or other unforeseen delay. Pretrial motions may be submitted only 48 hours before the pretrial is over. Final drafts of exhibit and witness lists must be submitted by March 21, 2025 at 12:00 p.m. . Responses to pretrial motions must be filed within 48 hours of the motion being made. Any motions filed outside of the assigned timeframes will not be permitted.
/s/ Singhski
District Court Judge(edited)
The pretrial has officially started and will end on
District Court Judge(edited)
singhskiAlthough this is accepted since no responsive pleading was filed, @Nicklaus you have 7 days.
Nicklaus 2025-03-17 08:00 p.m.
so just for the record is the motion to strike denied as moot
Nicklausso just for the record is the motion to strike denied as moot
singhski 2025-03-18 02:35 p.m.
Yes
Nicklaus 2025-03-20 10:11 a.m.@nauvelty wheres ur discovery broski
nauvelty 2025-03-20 11:46 a.m.
literally after iftar
nauvelty 2025-03-20 11:46 a.m.
6pm
nauveltyliterally after iftar
singhski 2025-03-20 04:01 p.m.
Did leave your discovery at suhur?
nauvelty 2025-03-21 02:52 a.m.
filed
UserMessage could not be loaded.
nauvelty 2025-03-21 02:52 a.m.
singhskiCc: @nauvelty @Nicklaus MINUTE ORDER ESTABLISHING PRETRIAL AND DISCOVERY TIMELINES The pretrial has officially started and will end on <t:1743004800:f...(edited)
nauvelty 2025-03-21 03:12 p.m.@Nicklaus 
Nicklaus 2025-03-21 03:14 p.m.
yeah you provided me with the discovery for your claim, and indeed, a video of the incident, 9 hours before the deadline(edited)
Nicklaus 2025-03-21 03:15 p.m.@singhski I’ll need an extension to discovery
Nicklausnauvelty 2025-03-22 03:10 a.m.
it takes like 5 minutes maximum out of ur time
singhski 2025-03-22 09:56 a.m.
Sure, @Nicklaus
singhski 2025-03-22 09:56 a.m.
Discovery deadline is extended to (Monday, March 24, 2025 at 12:00 p.m. )
nauvelty 2025-03-24 01:30 p.m.@Nicklaus past the deadline for a document
singhski 2025-03-24 02:48 p.m.@Nicklaus Why?
singhskiNicklaus 2025-03-24 04:05 p.m.
I’ve been at school all day
Nicklaus 2025-03-24 04:36 p.m.
i wasnt on discord until after the deadline, so i couldn't much get someone from the doj to do it either
Nicklaus 2025-03-24 04:36 p.m.
i can submit a pdf now that im home
Nicklaus 2025-03-24 04:37 p.m.
but if it is denied then it doesn't much matter because this can and should be resolved on summary judgment
Nicklaus 2025-03-24 04:38 p.m.
ive been spending more time drafting a sj motion than drafting discovery
NicklausI’ve been at school all day
singhski 2025-03-24 05:34 p.m.
You had Sunday. Are you a choir boy?
singhskiYou had Sunday. Are you a choir boy?
Nicklaus 2025-03-24 05:42 p.m.
i do stuff on the weekends yes
Nicklaus 2025-03-24 05:43 p.m.
but like i said i was drafting a sj motion instead of discovery
Nicklausbut like i said i was drafting a sj motion instead of discovery
singhski 2025-03-24 05:57 p.m.
I’m sure you have plenty of people working in your office, why didn’t you pawn it off to them?
singhskiI’m sure you have plenty of people working in your office, why didn’t you pawn it off to them?
Nicklaus 2025-03-24 05:58 p.m.
brenda is the only person who works in my office, and she lives across the world from me
Nicklaus 2025-03-24 05:58 p.m.
i explained why i didn't pawn it off today
singhski 2025-03-24 05:59 p.m.
Okay, you have until the end of the day EST, no more extensions will be entertained.
Nicklaus 2025-03-24 05:59 p.m.
thank you your honor
UserMessage could not be loaded.
Nicklaus 2025-03-24 11:50 p.m.
Nicklaus 2025-03-24 11:51 p.m.@singhski can we get updated pretrial dates
NicklausI’ve been at school all day
nauvelty 2025-03-25 09:10 a.m.
missed the chance for elite tiktok knowledge
nauvelty 2025-03-25 09:10 a.m.
jobs bro jobs 
Nicklaussinghski 2025-03-25 03:47 p.m.March 29, 2025 at 12:00 p.m.
singhskiNicklaus 2025-03-26 10:52 a.m.
can this be extended 12 hrs
Nicklaus 2025-03-26 10:52 a.m.
end of day Saturday est
Nicklaus 2025-03-26 10:53 a.m.
Nicklauscan this be extended 12 hrs
singhski 2025-03-26 11:01 a.m.
I have no problems with this, @nauvelty any objections?
singhskiI have no problems with this, @nauvelty any objections?
nauvelty 2025-03-26 11:45 a.m.
me neither: im off to berlin tomorrow and wont be back until 29th
nauvelty 2025-03-26 11:45 a.m.
so no objections
nauvelty 2025-03-26 11:45 a.m.
very convenient for me
Nicklauscan this be extended 12 hrs
singhski 2025-03-26 12:26 p.m.
Extension granted
Nicklaus 2025-03-29 04:45 p.m.
sigh!
Nicklaus 2025-03-29 04:45 p.m.
i move for another extension for a day or two
Nicklaus 2025-03-29 04:45 p.m.
the motion is done for the most part, i just need to do one more factor and add record cites
Nicklaus 2025-03-29 04:46 p.m.
im just not sure if ill be home tomorrow
Nicklausi move for another extension for a day or two
Nicklaus 2025-03-29 04:46 p.m.@singhski @nauvelty
Nicklaussinghski 2025-03-29 05:46 p.m.
One day
singhski 2025-03-29 05:46 p.m.
No more
singhski 2025-03-30 10:21 a.m.@Nicklaus Due today by fire by force
singhskiNicklaus 2025-03-30 10:57 a.m.
will submit this afternoon
Nicklaus 2025-03-30 10:57 a.m.
im going out
UserMessage could not be loaded.
Nicklaus 2025-03-30 10:05 p.m.
Nicklaus 2025-03-30 10:05 p.m.@singhski @nauvelty
singhski 2025-04-02 11:41 a.m.@nauvelty When can I expect your response?
singhskinauvelty 2025-04-02 12:12 p.m.
this weekend maybe but after this the court cant expect me to answer promptly: my gcses would be less than a month away and so all my attention would be devoted towards my studies
nauvelty 2025-04-02 12:14 p.m.
i hope this court would be able to understand the constraint id be under if i was expected to present my case during trial while simultaneously sitting the british equivalent of the SATS (gcses)
nauveltythis weekend maybe but after this the court cant expect me to answer promptly: my gcses would be less than a month away and so all my attention would be devoted towards my studies
singhski 2025-04-02 01:10 p.m.
Perhaps it would be in the best interest of your client that you don't represent him?
singhskiPerhaps it would be in the best interest of your client that you don't represent him?
nauvelty 2025-04-03 05:06 p.m.
your honour, my client has already expressed his intent in keeping me as his counsel privately, and the fact he doesn't mind this case being delayed for longer. with this in mind, i ask the court to stay the proceedings from the 12th may to 12th june, a month, at the very least for my gcses, unless you want this as a formal motion in which case i can file that motion alongside the opposition to this summary judgement
nauvelty 2025-04-03 05:07 p.m.
and i think the defendant would agree with this considering exam season in general is coming up: roblox court should not take precedent over irl grades
nauvelty 2025-04-03 05:07 p.m.
you included king singhski
Nicklaus 2025-04-03 11:29 p.m.
we object
Nicklaus 2025-04-03 11:29 p.m.
this was filed in December of last year
Nicklaus 2025-04-03 11:30 p.m.
my client doesn’t even remember what happened
Nicklaus 2025-04-03 11:30 p.m.
if we’re going to stay this for a month then it might as well just be dismissed
Nicklaus 2025-04-03 11:30 p.m.
and your gcses take a MONTH?
Nicklaus 2025-04-03 11:33 p.m.
i have ACTs Wednesday but I would never suggest my hobby court proceeding be stayed for a month because of that
Nicklaus 2025-04-03 11:34 p.m.
we very much mind that this has taken months, even if your client doesn’t
Nicklausand your gcses take a MONTH?
nauvelty 2025-04-04 01:27 a.m.
yes they take a month because gcses actually mean something
nauvelty 2025-04-04 01:27 a.m.
keep in mind they’re far different from the american sats
nauvelty 2025-04-04 01:28 a.m.
english, maths, french, bio, physics, chemistry, and three other chosen subjects
nauvelty 2025-04-04 01:30 a.m.
and they arent multiple choice they’re questions which require written responses to them
nauvelty 2025-04-04 01:42 a.m.
that being said, the fact your client doesnt remember what happened is their problem and would suggest they spend time reviewing the case with you, to dismiss this case is unfair and in any case an attempt at avoiding a legitimate resolution in the matter
to deny this request to stay sets a highly dangerous precedent, it allows courts to jeopardise irl exams that are going to determine what colleges and unis people get into because the defendant believes that a hobby court shouldnt be set aside for something that determines your entire future
to deny this request to stay sets a highly dangerous precedent, it allows courts to jeopardise irl exams that are going to determine what colleges and unis people get into because the defendant believes that a hobby court shouldnt be set aside for something that determines your entire future
Nicklaus 2025-04-04 08:01 a.m.
Review the case with me? It’s been 117 days since the shooting? If you can’t represent your client, then withdraw
Nicklaus 2025-04-04 08:01 a.m.
this doesn’t need stayed for 30 days
Nicklaus 2025-04-04 08:02 a.m.
I hear you about the exams but over 100 days and we aren’t even out of pretrial is absurd
nauveltyyour honour, my client has already expressed his intent in keeping me as his counsel privately, and the fact he doesn't mind this case being delayed for longer. with this in mind, ...
singhski 2025-04-04 12:16 p.m.
By then, 186 days would have passed since the incident
Nicklausthis doesn’t need stayed for 30 days
nauvelty 2025-04-04 12:42 p.m. 
Nicklaus 2025-04-04 12:43 p.m.
So drop the case or find substitute counsel
nauvelty 2025-04-04 12:43 p.m.
we are NOT dropping the case
nauvelty 2025-04-04 12:43 p.m.
you can settle with us and avoid having to wait even longer
nauveltyyou can settle with us and avoid having to wait even longer
singhski 2025-04-04 01:37 p.m.
Who told you we are waiting?
singhskiWho told you we are waiting?
singhski 2025-04-04 01:45 p.m.
Are you the president of presumptions?
singhski 2025-04-06 07:03 a.m.@Nicklaus It appears he has left everything
singhski 2025-04-09 01:59 p.m.@Born Who is representing you now?
singhskisinghski 2025-04-12 10:34 a.m.@Born
singhski 2025-04-12 10:34 a.m.
Are you going ahead with this or shall I assume you have abandoned the case and dismiss it?
singhski used /add
clerkFlow Bot2025-04-12 02:11 p.m. @singhski has added @Born to the case channel.
Case Modified
singhski 2025-04-12 02:11 p.m.@Born
Born 2025-04-12 02:24 p.m.
I wasn't aware that he left
Born 2025-04-12 02:25 p.m.
So i'm unsure what I need to do to find another person to represent me
Born 2025-04-12 02:25 p.m.
tbh it's kind of ridiculous that this case is somehow still going on..
singhskiNicklaus 2025-04-13 12:17 a.m.
this is the defendant
Nicklaus 2025-04-13 12:17 a.m.
we move to dismiss with prejudice
Nicklauswe move to dismiss with prejudice
singhski 2025-04-13 03:44 a.m.
I'll put this on paper later
singhski 2025-04-13 11:22 a.m.@goodness gracious Who is your attorney sir?
singhski used /add
clerkFlow Bot2025-04-13 11:22 a.m. @singhski has added @goodness gracious to the case channel.
Case Modified
goodness gracious 2025-04-13 05:03 p.m.
only just saw that he disappeared from the server completely out of nowhere I’ll get a new one asap
goodness graciousonly just saw that he disappeared from the server completely out of nowhere I’ll get a new one asap
singhski 2025-04-14 08:05 a.m.
How soon is ASAP?
singhskiHow soon is ASAP?
goodness gracious 2025-04-14 08:07 a.m.
as soon as this lawyer responds to me
goodness gracious 2025-04-14 08:07 a.m.
i am dming him now
singhski 2025-04-16 05:22 a.m.@goodness gracious
goodness gracious 2025-04-16 05:24 a.m.
hey
goodness gracioushey
singhski 2025-04-16 05:26 a.m.
What's going on? It's been 2 days, are you interested in this case?
goodness gracious 2025-04-16 05:27 a.m.
yea I’m getting a lawyer my ticket is open in their discord right now
goodness gracious 2025-04-16 05:27 a.m.
what’s the rush the case has already been up for over 120 days
goodness gracious 2025-04-16 05:27 a.m.
and the guy disappeared with no warning
goodness graciouswhat’s the rush the case has already been up for over 120 days
singhski 2025-04-16 05:30 a.m.
It shouldn't be
goodness gracious 2025-04-16 05:42 a.m.
yeah
goodness gracious 2025-04-17 12:58 a.m.
I am talking to lawyer now btw
goodness gracious 2025-04-17 12:58 a.m.
we are conversing some might say
Nicklaus 2025-04-20 09:00 a.m.@goodness gracious @singhski
shah 2025-04-20 03:38 p.m.@goodness gracious reply or dismissal
goodness gracious 2025-04-20 03:52 p.m.
hello
goodness gracious 2025-04-20 03:52 p.m.
you ping me while i was asleep
singhski 2025-04-20 04:08 p.m.@goodness gracious We're going to go ahead and dismiss
goodness gracious 2025-04-20 04:08 p.m.
why
goodness gracious 2025-04-20 04:09 p.m.
case gets kept up for like 130 days my lawyer disappears i don't get given sufficient time to find a new lawyer
goodness gracious 2025-04-20 04:09 p.m.
corrupt
singhski 2025-04-20 04:09 p.m.
You've had a week to find a new lawyer
goodness gracious 2025-04-20 04:09 p.m.
you do understand i literally cannot pay a new lawyer because the devs disabled sending money for tourists right
goodness gracious 2025-04-20 04:09 p.m.
not my fault a game function restricts me from continuing this
singhski 2025-04-20 04:10 p.m.
Your lawyer should understand that
goodness gracious 2025-04-20 04:10 p.m.
my lawyer randomly left probably due to being tired of the case not being dealt with
goodness gracious 2025-04-20 04:10 p.m.
what i don't understand is case gets left up for over 130 days and absolutely nothing happens my lawyer leaves and suddenly all this is happening?
goodness gracious 2025-04-20 04:10 p.m.
like what
singhski 2025-04-20 04:10 p.m.
I'm not going to concern my self with the payment plans devised by lawyers
goodness gracious 2025-04-20 04:11 p.m.
yea except its not anything to do with that its the fact i physically CANNOT
goodness gracious 2025-04-20 04:11 p.m.
because of the restrictions devs have put into place for exploiters
singhski 2025-04-20 04:11 p.m.
Again, your lawyer must understand that, and provide representation regardless
singhski 2025-04-20 04:11 p.m.
The gears of the judicial system are still running, new cases are being filed daily
singhskiAgain, your lawyer must understand that, and provide representation regardless
singhski 2025-04-20 04:12 p.m.
or perhaps receive payment after the restriction is lifted
singhskiAgain, your lawyer must understand that, and provide representation regardless
goodness gracious 2025-04-20 04:12 p.m.
ok well do you want me to try dm a 9th lawyer about it
goodness gracious 2025-04-20 04:12 p.m.
most people typically won't do a job without payment first
goodness graciousok well do you want me to try dm a 9th lawyer about it
singhski 2025-04-20 04:13 p.m.
You have to show some sort of desire to keep this case running, you only seem to show that desire when prompted
singhskiYou have to show some sort of desire to keep this case running, you only seem to show that desire when prompted
goodness gracious 2025-04-20 04:13 p.m.
im pretty sure the desire was my lawyer trying to get the case dealt with for over 130 days but clearly it didn't get very far for him
goodness gracious 2025-04-20 04:13 p.m.
i physically cannot show desire to keep it running when i cannot find a lawyer that wants to do it without payment first
goodness gracious 2025-04-20 04:13 p.m.
because the devs cannot fix their game
goodness gracious 2025-04-21 10:36 a.m.
As of now I am still trying to find someone that would be interested without prior payment
Nicklaus 2025-04-25 09:44 p.m.@singhski we’re going to move to expedite a ruling on our pending summary judgment
goodness gracious 2025-04-25 10:45 p.m.
Currently in talks with a lawyer who says he will file. Will explain how the case has been up for over 120 days and see if he’s still interested.
goodness gracious 2025-04-26 04:40 a.m.@singhski My lawyer is @huddy.
Nicklaus 2025-04-26 11:29 p.m.
it took 20 days to find a laywer?
Nicklaus 2025-04-26 11:29 p.m.
:/
Nicklaus 2025-04-26 11:29 p.m.
he runs like the most popular firm in the state
shah 2025-04-27 01:41 p.m.
Please take notice that I will be assuming responsibility for all pending cases previously assigned to Ret. Judge Singhski. All existing deadlines, motions, and scheduled appearances are hereby extended and granted continuances until 5th May which is when I will be back from exams
Clerkistrate @CashhCuIture is appointed to all cases.
Clerkistrate @CashhCuIture is appointed to all cases.
Nicklaus 2025-04-27 06:56 p.m.
oh my god
Nicklausit took 20 days to find a laywer?
goodness gracious 2025-04-27 09:52 p.m.
It takes 20 days to find a lawyer when the devs don’t know how to fix their game (tourists being unable to drop or send money) which results in me being unable to pay first which in turn crosses out 90% of firms. Understand this
Nicklaus 2025-04-27 09:52 p.m.
no I don’t care
Nicklaus 2025-04-27 09:52 p.m.
it’s been half a year
goodness gracious 2025-04-27 09:52 p.m.
Not my problem
Nicklaus 2025-04-27 09:53 p.m.
yes it is
goodness gracious 2025-04-27 09:53 p.m.
I’ve had a lawyer for over 120 days yet the case was prolonged for such an extent of time he completely left the server
goodness gracious 2025-04-27 09:53 p.m.
Not my problem the case has been up for this long
goodness gracious 2025-04-27 09:53 p.m.
Understand this
Nicklaus 2025-04-27 09:54 p.m.
your lawyer left the case and abandoned u cuz he didn’t wanna deal with this case during exams
goodness gracious 2025-04-27 09:54 p.m.
Which wouldn’t of happened if the case wasn’t kept up for this amount of time
goodness gracious 2025-04-27 09:54 p.m.
You’re just going back to square 1 with this
Nicklaus 2025-04-27 09:54 p.m.
he was partly to blame for that
Nicklaus 2025-04-27 09:55 p.m.
it then took you 20 days to get a lawyer after he left, and you never even tried until prompted over and over again
Nicklaus 2025-04-27 09:55 p.m.
it’s been half a year
Nicklaus 2025-04-27 09:55 p.m.
it is entirely a problem
Nicklaus 2025-04-27 09:55 p.m.
and it is your problem because you are the plaintiff
goodness gracious 2025-04-27 09:55 p.m.
You clearly are just spouting nonsense without knowing what was going on behind the scenes
goodness gracious 2025-04-27 09:55 p.m.
It’s not my problem the devs cannot fix their game which resulted in that
Nicklaus 2025-04-27 09:55 p.m.
I don’t care what was going on behind the scenes
goodness gracious 2025-04-27 09:55 p.m.
You know nothing of what was happening during the time of finding a lawyer so you shouldn’t speak of it
Nicklaus 2025-04-27 09:55 p.m.
it’s been half a year
goodness gracious 2025-04-27 09:56 p.m.
So?
goodness gracious 2025-04-27 09:56 p.m.
Did you not want to keep the case going? Or did your client have another lawyer
goodness gracious 2025-04-27 09:56 p.m.
You need to understand these things take time
Nicklaus 2025-04-27 09:56 p.m.
they do take time
Nicklaus 2025-04-27 09:56 p.m.
not half a year
Nicklaus 2025-04-27 09:57 p.m.
my client didn’t even remember this by the time I contacted him
Nicklaus 2025-04-27 09:57 p.m.
it was 100 days by that point
Nicklaus 2025-04-27 09:57 p.m.
you and your lawyer have a responsibility for this stuff
Nicklaus 2025-04-27 09:57 p.m.
and your lawyer was to blame (not fully) for the delay before I was here
Nicklausand your lawyer was to blame (not fully) for the delay before I was here
goodness gracious 2025-04-27 09:58 p.m.
Not at all 90% of the time of this case has been switching between judges
Nicklaus 2025-04-27 09:58 p.m.
he then left this case
Nicklaus 2025-04-27 09:58 p.m.
which resulted in another 24 days delay
goodness gracious 2025-04-27 09:58 p.m.
Cases take time if you can’t handle the time they take I recommend you to pursue other careers(edited)
Nicklaus 2025-04-27 09:58 p.m.
you’re not understanding
goodness gracious 2025-04-27 09:59 p.m.
You’re not understanding that it’s not my problem the devs can’t fix their game which is why it took this time to find a lawyer
goodness gracious 2025-04-27 09:59 p.m.
Good day. I will speak with you later if you wish
Nicklaus 2025-04-27 09:59 p.m.
but that was only a minute reason for the delay
Nicklaus 2025-04-27 09:59 p.m.
24 day delay
Nicklaus 2025-04-27 09:59 p.m.
out of the half the year delay
Nicklaus 2025-04-27 10:00 p.m.
the responsibility is on you and your counsel to prosecute this case
Nicklaus 2025-04-27 10:00 p.m.
I understand abandoning the case did not help with that
Nicklaus 2025-04-27 10:00 p.m.
but it has been half a year
Nicklaus 2025-04-27 10:00 p.m.
nobody remembers what happened
goodness gracious 2025-04-27 10:48 p.m.
I remember perfectly what happened. If you were to be in my shoes with limited knowledge of lawyer firms and unable to transfer cash first you wouldn’t exactly get a lawyer immediately either.
Nicklaus 2025-04-27 11:22 p.m.
that’s great
Nicklaus 2025-04-27 11:22 p.m. 
Nicklaus 2025-04-27 11:23 p.m.
the motion for summary judgment was submitted just under a month ago
Nicklaus 2025-04-27 11:23 p.m.
get ur show on the road
Nicklaus 2025-04-27 11:28 p.m.
can someone add @huddy.
Nicklaus 2025-04-27 11:29 p.m.@shah @Brenda @sav
NicklausClick to see attachment.
goodness gracious 2025-04-28 02:04 a.m.
Did I say he remembered? I simply mentioned that I, myself remember perfectly
shah 2025-04-30 06:52 a.m.
Magistrate @Cappy ine appointed per 5 M.S.C. 1 § 2202.1
shah used /add
clerkFlow Bot2025-04-30 06:52 a.m. @shah has added @Cappy to the case channel.
Case Modified
Cappy 2025-04-30 09:30 a.m.@goodness gracious @Nicklaus Please resubmit or bring to my attention any and all motions that need to be reviewed
CappyNicklaus 2025-04-30 12:54 p.m.
Nicklaus 2025-04-30 12:55 p.m.
still waiting for a response
Cappy 2025-04-30 01:53 p.m.@goodness gracious Okay where are you at with retaining counsel
Nicklausstill waiting for a response
Cappy 2025-04-30 01:54 p.m.
After looking through the history of this case I am willing to be flexible due to the plaintiff's previous representation just leaving with no notice but he needs to retain someone in the next 24 hours
CappyAfter looking through the history of this case I am willing to be flexible due to the plaintiff's previous representation just leaving with no notice but he needs to retain someone...
Nicklaus 2025-04-30 01:55 p.m.
he has retained @huddy.
Nicklaushe has retained @huddy.
Cappy 2025-04-30 01:55 p.m.
Oh I see that, thank you for clarifying.
Cappy 2025-04-30 01:56 p.m.@huddy. When can I expect a response?
CappyNicklaus 2025-04-30 02:06 p.m.
hes not in the channel i dont think
Cappy used /add
clerkFlow Bot2025-04-30 02:23 p.m. @Cappy has added @huddy. to the case channel.
Case Modified
Cappy 2025-04-30 02:23 p.m.@huddy. Hello
Cappy 2025-04-30 02:25 p.m.
How long do you need to respond? I won’t fault you obviously for not having previously indicated your intent to respond given you weren’t even added yet
huddy. 2025-04-30 04:23 p.m.
Response tomorrow, out rn
huddy. 2025-04-30 04:23 p.m.
Please allow until weekend
huddy.Please allow until weekend
Cappy 2025-04-30 04:56 p.m.
Should I expect it tomorrow or are you asking for Saturday
Nicklaus 2025-05-02 06:05 p.m.@huddy. @Cappy
Nicklaus 2025-05-02 06:05 p.m.
might we speed it up
Nicklaus 2025-05-02 06:06 p.m.
you've had a week to become acquainted with the case
Nicklaus 2025-05-02 06:06 p.m.
where response
Nicklaus 2025-05-02 06:06 p.m.
:(
huddy.Response tomorrow, out rn
Cappy 2025-05-02 08:58 p.m.
Ok you have 24 hours before I’m going to rule
huddy. 2025-05-04 03:43 a.m.
Home in 8 hours, will file then
huddy. 2025-05-04 02:42 p.m.
Filing rn
huddy. 2025-05-04 02:50 p.m.
HolyRomanRyan 2025-05-04 08:01 p.m.
huddy.Click to see attachment.
Cappy 2025-05-05 10:52 a.m.
Any reason it was late?
CappyAny reason it was late?
huddy. 2025-05-05 10:55 a.m.
Wasn't home until then, never filed earlier cuz went to sleep when the 24 hour mark hit
huddy. 2025-05-05 10:55 a.m.
Apologies
Nicklaus 2025-05-05 11:58 a.m.
but like you have a whole firm of people and had a week
Nicklaus 2025-05-05 11:58 a.m.
we have a few motions regarding the response before you rule @Cappy
Nicklaus 2025-05-05 11:58 a.m.
but I’m in class rn so I’ll have them later today
Nicklauswe have a few motions regarding the response before you rule @Cappy
Cappy 2025-05-05 12:13 p.m.
Noted
Nicklausbut like you have a whole firm of people and had a week
huddy. 2025-05-05 01:31 p.m.
Oh no
huddy. 2025-05-05 01:31 p.m.
a. I don't have a 'whole firm of people'
huddy. 2025-05-05 01:32 p.m.
b. How are you complaining and trying to get a motion denied due to the fact that it wasn't handed in before your attention span limit
Nicklausbut I’m in class rn so I’ll have them later today
huddy. 2025-05-05 01:32 p.m.
You have a whole department full of people
huddy. 2025-05-05 01:32 p.m.
CappyNoted
Nicklaus 2025-05-05 06:50 p.m.
we’re just going to move for leave to file a reply
Nicklaus 2025-05-05 06:51 p.m.
i don’t think a motion to strike would be well taken but it is disappointing that this matter has gone on 5 months
Nicklauswe’re just going to move for leave to file a reply
Nicklaus 2025-05-05 06:51 p.m.
The court has held in the past that leave is not technically required for a reply
Nicklaus 2025-05-05 06:51 p.m.
but uhh
Nicklaus 2025-05-05 06:51 p.m.
it’s not super clear
Nicklaus 2025-05-05 06:54 p.m. CASE INFORMATION**
IN THE MAYFLOWER DISTRICT COURT FOR CLARK COUNTY
---
Velemen v. IT4L14AN
Trial Type: Civil
Judge Assigned: Hon. Judge Nomadity - Courtroom 102
Plaintiff Counsel: davie9000, Esq.
Defendant Counsel: Nicklaus_s, Esq.
---
CLAIMS PRESENTED**
…
you can see https://trello.com/c/zuzPX2yP/440-velemen-v-it4l14n for that
---
---
…
Comments
1Labels
Civil, Closed, Dismissed w/ PrejudiceNicklaus 2025-05-05 06:54 p.m.
anyways we believe our motion has been misconstrued and believe a reply would serve the court well in making a decision
Nicklauswe’re just going to move for leave to file a reply
Cappy 2025-05-05 08:24 p.m.
You can file a reply.
Cappy 2025-05-05 08:24 p.m.
But I hope it actually contains some substance and isn’t just a waste of the courts time
huddy. 2025-05-07 12:13 p.m.@Cappy Your Honor I filed our response almost 3 days ago and the State, with their entire department of personnel, have failed to file any reply or response motion
huddy. 2025-05-07 12:13 p.m.
May we move on?
huddy. 2025-05-07 12:13 p.m.
This case has dragged out long enough
Cappy 2025-05-07 04:01 p.m.@Nicklaus you are really testing the courts patience
CappyNicklaus 2025-05-07 04:12 p.m.
I’ve been out of state
NicklausI’ve been out of state
huddy. 2025-05-07 04:15 p.m.
Your department has six times more employees than my firm!! How is this not done yet!!
Nicklaus 2025-05-07 04:15 p.m.
i have one other staff member who has submitted a notice of resignation
Nicklaus 2025-05-07 04:16 p.m.
please don’t belittle me
Nicklaus 2025-05-07 04:17 p.m.
there was no scheduling order for my reply
huddy. 2025-05-07 04:19 p.m.
Just responding with what you've been bugging me with pal
Nicklaus 2025-05-07 05:13 p.m.
im not arguing with you
Nicklaus 2025-05-07 05:13 p.m.
you are being combative for the sake of it
Nicklaus 2025-05-07 05:15 p.m.
you said you would have a response in a day and then ghosted the court for four days while violating a scheduling order even after being retained for over a week 
Nicklaus 2025-05-07 05:17 p.m.
to the month-old motion in the five-month old case(edited)
NicklausI’ve been out of state
Cappy 2025-05-07 06:13 p.m.
That isn’t an excuse. I was giving you flexibility but now my hands are tied. Deadline is going to be 48 hours from this message.
Cappy 2025-05-07 06:13 p.m.
Please communicate next time if it’s going to be a very extended period of time.
Nicklausyou said you would have a response in a day and then ghosted the court for four days while violating a scheduling order even after being retained for over a week
Cappy 2025-05-07 06:14 p.m.@huddy. Both of you stop bickering please. I know how tempting it is because I loved doing it when I practiced but we need to keep it professional please.
CappyPlease communicate next time if it’s going to be a very extended period of time.
Nicklaus 2025-05-07 06:25 p.m.
I’m home now
Nicklaus 2025-05-07 06:25 p.m.
but this was the same excuse James gave
Nicklaus 2025-05-07 06:25 p.m.
anyways I hope to have it in tonight
Nicklaus 2025-05-07 06:25 p.m.
that was my original plan
Nicklausanyways I hope to have it in tonight
Nicklaus 2025-05-07 10:02 p.m.
3/4 done will submit tmrw
Nicklausbut this was the same excuse James gave
Cappy 2025-05-08 01:03 a.m.
And I had the same response
Nicklaus 2025-05-09 06:07 p.m.
trying to submit now but uhh
Nicklaus 2025-05-09 06:07 p.m.
uno momento
Nicklaus 2025-05-09 06:25 p.m.DEFENDANT'S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
CC:@Cappy @huddy.
Nicklaus 2025-05-09 11:32 p.m.
forgot to add that even if there was a glitch, it won’t preclude summary judgment bcuz it is a fact so credited by the evidence any disagreement won’t matter under scott
huddy. 2025-05-10 04:45 a.m.
It's like you wrote this reply without even reading the complaint
huddy. 2025-05-10 04:45 a.m.
Also you keep referring to real life where touching somebody with a car is AWDW but that is completely invalid on Roblox where somebody can be glitched to stand in the middle of a car and there are specifically 'struck' animations placed there by the developers to know when it counts as AWDW and hitting
CappyNicklaus 2025-05-10 10:28 a.m.
Nicklaus 2025-05-10 10:28 a.m.
yo Mr dude
Nicklaus 2025-05-10 10:32 a.m.
this might be helpful for ya
huddy. 2025-05-10 10:42 a.m.
I didn't realise we were using criminal trials in the district court as precedent 
huddy. 2025-05-10 10:43 a.m.
An irrelevant one with completely differing facts too
Nicklaus 2025-05-10 11:23 a.m.
1. The facts are pretty close to this case. The defendant commanded something from the victim, buttoned their windows, and then made contact with the vehicle (a material fact… admitted by both of us). It was then found that his use of force was objectively reasonable, because of the circumstances.
2. Thank you for recognizing that there is little precedent for this issue particularized here. That doesn’t fare better for you. It just makes it more likely that the law was not clearly established at the time (something you ignore completely in your response) entitling the defendant here to qualified immunity.
"[Clearly established means] existing law must have placed the constitutionality of the officer's conduct 'beyond debate.'"D.C. v. Wesby , 583 U.S. 48, 63 (2018) (quoting Ashcroft v. al-Kidd , 563 U.S. 731, 741 (2011)).
"The Supreme Court has emphasized, especially in the Fourth Amendment context, that we may not 'define clearly established law at a high level of generality.'"West v. City of Caldwell , 931 F.3d 978, 983 (9th Cir. 2019) (quoting Kisela v. Hughes , 584 U.S. 100, 104 (2018) (per curiam)). "Rather, we must locate a controlling case that 'squarely governs the specific facts at issue,' except in the 'rare obvious case' in which a general legal principle makes the unlawfulness of the officer's conduct clear despite a lack of precedent addressing similar circumstances." Id. (quoting City of Escondido, Cal. v. Emmons , 586 U.S. 38, 42 (2019) (per curiam)).
2. Thank you for recognizing that there is little precedent for this issue particularized here. That doesn’t fare better for you. It just makes it more likely that the law was not clearly established at the time (something you ignore completely in your response) entitling the defendant here to qualified immunity.
"[Clearly established means] existing law must have placed the constitutionality of the officer's conduct 'beyond debate.'"
"The Supreme Court has emphasized, especially in the Fourth Amendment context, that we may not 'define clearly established law at a high level of generality.'"
Nicklaus 2025-05-10 11:24 a.m.
I’m not arguing with u more cuz we’re both parroting what has already been briefed on
Nicklaus 2025-05-11 07:42 p.m.@Cappy can we have an estimated time on how long it will take to rule
NicklausCappy 2025-05-11 11:48 p.m.
It’s going to be some time, I also need to get it signed off
shah 2025-05-24 09:23 a.m.@Cappy
Nicklaus 2025-05-27 01:53 p.m.@Cappy @shah
huddy. 2025-05-27 02:52 p.m.
thats a long ass signature
Cappy 2025-05-27 02:58 p.m.
Ok let me handle this
Cappy 2025-05-27 03:11 p.m.
The motion for summary judgement is DENIED . Case will proceed. If someone wants a pdf ruling they can ask for it but if not I'm not going to impede a speedy trial by taking the time to do that.
Cappy 2025-05-27 03:12 p.m.
CC: @huddy. @Nicklaus
Nicklaus 2025-05-27 03:12 p.m.
why is it denied
huddy. 2025-05-27 03:12 p.m.
Thanks
Nicklaus 2025-05-27 03:13 p.m.
nothing about this is speedy so i dont find that reason very compelling
Nicklaus 2025-05-27 03:13 p.m.
we'd ask for a pdf
Nicklaus 2025-05-27 03:13 p.m.
or ur grounds stated on the record
Nicklausor ur grounds stated on the record
Nicklaus 2025-05-27 03:35 p.m.@Cappy
Nicklaus 2025-05-27 04:08 p.m.
nevermind
Nicklaus 2025-05-27 04:08 p.m.@shah @Cappy we move to vacate the order 
Nicklaus 2025-05-28 06:39 p.m.@shah Hey
Nicklaus 2025-05-29 09:04 p.m.@shah 2
Nicklaus 2025-05-29 09:04 p.m.@Cappy
shah 2025-05-31 09:19 a.m.
ok @Nicklaus
shah 2025-05-31 01:21 p.m.
who are you representing @Nicklaus
shah 2025-05-31 01:21 p.m.
ridgevilleborn yes
shahwho are you representing @Nicklaus
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 01:21 p.m.
ridgevill
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 01:21 p.m.
yes sir
shah 2025-05-31 01:21 p.m.
ok let me review this chat cus i havent even read naything
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 01:21 p.m.
i rlly just wanna know grounds for denial of sj so i can appeal
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 01:22 p.m.
cuz its QI
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 01:22 p.m.
but nonetheless theres no authority to enter such an order
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 01:22 p.m.
he can only enter a report & recommendation
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 01:22 p.m.
we follow the federal system of magistrates
shah 2025-05-31 01:22 p.m.
where his ruling again
shah 2025-05-31 01:22 p.m.rulings
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 01:22 p.m.
shah 2025-05-31 01:49 p.m.
was he granted qualified immunity by the solicitor general @Nicklaus
shah 2025-05-31 01:49 p.m.
i assume your representing the defendant and not the government
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 01:49 p.m.
what
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 01:49 p.m.
under what statute
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 01:49 p.m.
what immunity
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 01:50 p.m.
hes being sued in his individual capacity and SGO offered representation
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 01:50 p.m.
but since i resigned from SGO i continue represneting in my private capacity
shah 2025-05-31 01:50 p.m. 
Nicklausbut since i resigned from SGO i continue represneting in my private capacity
shah 2025-05-31 01:50 p.m.
ok so the state isn't an intervenor
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 01:51 p.m.
no
shah 2025-05-31 01:51 p.m.
then the motion for summary judgement remains denied
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 01:51 p.m.
ok why
shah 2025-05-31 01:51 p.m.
i will write ruling in a ferw
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 01:51 p.m.
the SGO never had to defend him
shahClick to see attachment.
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 01:52 p.m.
if ur trying to deny it under this
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 01:52 p.m.
these SGO statutes dont apply whatsoever
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 01:52 p.m.
he isnt sued in his official or quasi official capcity
Nicklaushe isnt sued in his official or quasi official capcity
shah 2025-05-31 01:53 p.m. 
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 01:53 p.m.
he isnt being sued in his official capacity
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 01:53 p.m.
he was acting under the color of the law, yes
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 01:54 p.m.
but that doesnt mean he has to be sued in his official capacity
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 01:54 p.m.
see e.g. tactical_pancakes v. msp
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 01:54 p.m.
(applying course of proceedings test)
shah 2025-05-31 01:54 p.m.@huddy. verify
shah 2025-05-31 01:55 p.m.
only your documentation says in his individual capacity
shah 2025-05-31 01:55 p.m.
the case caption does not
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 01:55 p.m.
the case caption does
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 01:55 p.m. 
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 01:55 p.m.
the government is not named
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 01:55 p.m.
and the parties section does not say he is sued in official capacity
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 01:56 p.m.
if he was sued in his official capacity then i would've motion to dismiss his state law claim under sov immunity
shah 2025-05-31 01:57 p.m.
ok well lets clarify the record by asking the plaintiff's counsel
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 01:57 p.m.
and he had private-capacity represnetation at the beignning of the case (holyromanryan)
shah 2025-05-31 01:58 p.m.
the complaint alleges official capacity and a duty of care
shah 2025-05-31 01:58 p.m.
i am aware that does not necessarily mean that he is being sued in his official capacity but the court will excerise diligence
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 01:58 p.m.
no relief is sought against the government though
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 01:58 p.m.
i think just applying the course of proceedings test suffices
shah 2025-05-31 01:58 p.m.
yes but the original and amended complaints have been written by npz_v and since then there has been a substitution of counsel
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 01:59 p.m.
yes but this case is from december
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 01:59 p.m.
if we are changing parties now then
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 01:59 p.m.
everything is just covered under statutes of limitation
shah 2025-05-31 02:01 p.m.
the court notes your profuse anger but will wait for mr. @huddy. 's response
shahthe court notes your profuse anger but will wait for mr. @huddy. 's response
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 02:13 p.m.
i understand but just so my objection is on the record: what james says doesnt matter
1. "If the denomination of the party defendant by the plaintiff were the sole test of whether a suit was against the officer individually or against his principal, the sovereign, our task would be easy." Larson v. Domestic Foreign Corp, 337 U.S. 682, 687 (1949). "the crucial question is whether the relief sought in a suit nominally addressed to the officer is relief against the sovereign." Id. this suit seeks damages from the officer personally, and does not require the governemnt to take ANY action. "The judgment sought will not require action by the sovereign or disturb the sovereign's property. There is, therefore, no jurisdictional difficulty." Id., at 687-88.
2. also under the course of proceedings test (best articulated by brenda in tactical_pancakes v. msp https://discord.com/channels/1274202187911790632/1327680575099895941/1334632984925573273) it is against the officer personally because the relief is sought personally, qualified immunity has been brought as a defense, and because "wrongful death" talks about an "individual"
1. "If the denomination of the party defendant by the plaintiff were the sole test of whether a suit was against the officer individually or against his principal, the sovereign, our task would be easy." Larson v. Domestic Foreign Corp, 337 U.S. 682, 687 (1949). "the crucial question is whether the relief sought in a suit nominally addressed to the officer is relief against the sovereign." Id. this suit seeks damages from the officer personally, and does not require the governemnt to take ANY action. "The judgment sought will not require action by the sovereign or disturb the sovereign's property. There is, therefore, no jurisdictional difficulty." Id., at 687-88.
2. also under the course of proceedings test (best articulated by brenda in tactical_pancakes v. msp https://discord.com/channels/1274202187911790632/1327680575099895941/1334632984925573273) it is against the officer personally because the relief is sought personally, qualified immunity has been brought as a defense, and because "wrongful death" talks about an "individual"
huddy. 2025-05-31 03:01 p.m.
Home in 30
huddy. 2025-05-31 03:02 p.m.@shah He is being sued in his official capacity
huddy. 2025-05-31 03:02 p.m.
It's not our decision that Defendant chose private-capacity representation
shah 2025-05-31 03:02 p.m.
ok please file an amended complaint clarifying that within 24 hours or the action will be dismissed(edited)
shah 2025-05-31 03:06 p.m.@huddy.
huddy. 2025-05-31 03:30 p.m.
Loud and clear
huddy. 2025-05-31 03:34 p.m.@shah I'm confused
huddy. 2025-05-31 03:35 p.m.
When a complaint is made, and it doesn't say official capacity, it was my impression that in the instance that you wanted it to be in individual capacity, that would be the only time you would specifically go out of the way to say "in his individual capacity"
huddy. 2025-05-31 03:36 p.m.
Our complaint doesn't state in his individual capacity at any point in time, and specifically mentions in the parties section "is a resident of the State of
Mayflower, Clark County and a Master Deputy for the Clark County Sheriff’s Office"
Later in the complaint, it clearly states the following image
Mayflower, Clark County and a Master Deputy for the Clark County Sheriff’s Office"
Later in the complaint, it clearly states the following image
shah 2025-05-31 03:36 p.m.
the complaint does not specify individual or official capacity(edited)
shah 2025-05-31 03:36 p.m.
we have already discussed that above. please amend the complaint accordingly
huddy. 2025-05-31 03:37 p.m.
So where do you want me to put this
huddy. 2025-05-31 03:37 p.m.
in the title?
huddy. 2025-05-31 03:37 p.m.
And sorry, I missed that chain of messages
shah 2025-05-31 03:37 p.m.
amend as necessary including the relief you would like from the government
shah 2025-05-31 03:37 p.m.
and ask for summons for the appropriate officers
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 05:05 p.m.@shah how is he amending the complaint
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 05:05 p.m.
discovery is completed
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 05:05 p.m.
the pleadings stage has closed
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 05:05 p.m.
like we're way too far into this
shah 2025-05-31 05:06 p.m.
we are still in pre-trial i would assume since there was a pending judgment on the motion for sj
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 05:06 p.m.
you do know the government wasnt summoned to start with
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 05:06 p.m.
cuz this isnt against the government
shahwe are still in pre-trial i would assume since there was a pending judgment on the motion for sj
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 05:06 p.m.
we're not
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 05:06 p.m.
the motion for summary judgment is two months old
shah 2025-05-31 05:06 p.m.
i am not inclinced to dismiss this as this would just come up again but in a new manifestation
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 05:06 p.m.
this wont come up again bcuz its barred by the statutes of limitations :/
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 05:07 p.m.
we're too far into be changing and substituting parties
shah 2025-05-31 05:07 p.m.
what statue of limitation
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 05:07 p.m.
this doesnt make sense
shahwhat statue of limitation
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 05:08 p.m. 
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 05:08 p.m.
you'll find that the actions that gave rise to the complaint occured in december of 2024
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 05:08 p.m.
and the complaint has been amended since then
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 05:08 p.m.
so parties should have already been dealt with
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 05:08 p.m.
its pretty clear that it was individual capcity from the start
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 05:09 p.m.
like it should've been dealt with when everyone was being summoned
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 05:09 p.m.
if there was a dispute
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 05:11 p.m.
also
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 05:11 p.m.
Nicklaus 2025-05-31 05:11 p.m.
this seems pretty pertinent
shah 2025-05-31 05:13 p.m.
it seems mr laus is correct
shah 2025-05-31 05:13 p.m.
do you have any comments before i rule @huddy.
shah 2025-05-31 05:14 p.m.
please let me know if you wish to continue to file suit under the (original claims of ??) individual capacity(edited)
shah 2025-05-31 05:14 p.m.
that is a different issue
huddy. 2025-06-01 04:58 a.m.
How is it pretty clear that it was individual capacity from the start
huddy. 2025-06-01 04:58 a.m.
Nowhere is it signposted that it is individual capacity
huddy. 2025-06-01 04:58 a.m.
It's perfectly standard to only detail ind cap if it is ind cap
huddy. 2025-06-01 04:59 a.m.
It is clearly signposted throughout that it is official capacity
huddy. 2025-06-01 05:00 a.m.
Thus, your ruling that we should amend is the only thing that would give rise to this statue of limitations issue
huddy. 2025-06-01 05:00 a.m.
it is their decision to never have brought this up until now
Nicklaus 2025-06-01 11:19 a.m.
no
Nicklaus 2025-06-01 11:20 a.m.
you dont have to say something is individual capacity
Nicklaus 2025-06-01 11:20 a.m.
that is always assumed
Nicklaus 2025-06-01 11:20 a.m.
this capacity issue should've been resolved at the beginning of litigation
Nicklaus 2025-06-01 11:20 a.m.
and it was
Nicklaus 2025-06-01 11:20 a.m. 
Nicklaus 2025-06-01 11:21 a.m.
and it is not our decision to not bring this up until now
Nicklaus 2025-06-01 11:21 a.m.
i never brought this issue up
Nicklaus 2025-06-01 11:21 a.m.
because its not an issue
Nicklausthat is always assumed
huddy. 2025-06-01 11:44 a.m.
how can it be assumed when it is clearly referenced
huddy. 2025-06-01 11:44 a.m.
throughout
huddy. 2025-06-01 11:44 a.m.
that defendant was in his ccso employeeship
shah 2025-06-01 11:46 a.m.
if this was an official capacity case was this arbitrated @huddy.
shah 2025-06-01 11:46 a.m.
for my own curiosity
shah 2025-06-01 11:46 a.m.
if so please provide me a copy of the final arbitration order
adlithestevenson 2025-06-02 01:47 a.m.
Please note:
As original defense counsel, I was contracted through the Sheriff's Office to represent the Defendant. This was private representation, as I was not affiliated with the government. To the best of my knowledge, under RichoCornwall, this suit proceeded in individual capacity given the course of events and my presence as counsel.
I apologise for the intrusion, but I hope to clarify this issue.
cc:@shah @huddy. @Nicklaus (edited)
As original defense counsel, I was contracted through the Sheriff's Office to represent the Defendant. This was private representation, as I was not affiliated with the government. To the best of my knowledge, under RichoCornwall, this suit proceeded in individual capacity given the course of events and my presence as counsel.
I apologise for the intrusion, but I hope to clarify this issue.
cc:
shahif this was an official capacity case was this arbitrated @huddy.
huddy. 2025-06-02 04:22 p.m.
I will have to check with previous attorneys
huddy. 2025-06-02 04:22 p.m.
allow me to do so
adlithestevensonPlease note: As original defense counsel, I was contracted through the Sheriff's Office to represent the Defendant. This was private representation, as I was not affiliated with th...(edited)
huddy. 2025-06-02 04:23 p.m.
So you decided on your own that this was an individual capacity suit and decided to represent the government whilst not being employed by the government?
huddy. 2025-06-02 04:23 p.m.
either you are just going around committing violations or you were contracted by a government agency, CCSO, which therefore would in good faith show that you did represent the government
Nicklaus 2025-06-02 04:36 p.m.
ur the only one confused james
Nicklaus 2025-06-02 04:36 p.m.
it is individual capacity
Nicklaus 2025-06-02 04:36 p.m.
it has always been individual capacity
Nicklaus 2025-06-02 04:36 p.m. 
Nicklaus 2025-06-02 04:37 p.m.
it cannot be against the govenrmenet
Nicklaus 2025-06-02 04:37 p.m.
you cant sue the government for wrongful death
huddy.So you decided on your own that this was an individual capacity suit and decided to represent the government whilst not being employed by the government?
adlithestevenson 2025-06-02 07:20 p.m.
Please utilize the course of proceedings test. Given the monetary damages and the torts invoked, plus the indication that arbitration would be unconstitutional given the private defense, it was only logical that I, as NHCSO counsel, would represent a NHCSO Deputy sued. Even if it is against the government, that precludes your cause under 5 M.S.C. 1 § 3104.1 given that that is an individual capacity tort, so I would choose your arguments very wisely, counselor.
huddy.either you are just going around committing violations or you were contracted by a government agency, CCSO, which therefore would in good faith show that you did represent the gove...
adlithestevenson 2025-06-02 07:23 p.m.
I would also advise your against fallacious and errant reasoning. First, you present a false dichotomy, which indicates that you have the logical capacity of the average FoxNews anchor. Second, if this suit was against the government, then SGO would take primary lead on representation. However, that does not preclude a private attorney, being contracted with a government agency, to handle litigation against, or surrounding, that agency's interests when the suit proceeds in individual capacity. This is common in local governments where a City Attorney would be unwise.
Nicklaus 2025-06-02 07:29 p.m.@shah can you rule on the motion for summary judgment\
Nicklaus 2025-06-02 07:29 p.m.
i been waiting ages
shah 2025-06-02 07:30 p.m. 
shahClick to see attachment.
Nicklaus 2025-06-02 07:34 p.m.
ok but sometime soon, queen
Nicklaus 2025-06-02 07:34 p.m.
cuz im tired of waiting
Nicklaus 2025-06-02 07:34 p.m.
very very tired
Nicklaus 2025-06-02 07:35 p.m. 
adlithestevenson 2025-06-02 07:39 p.m.
Maybe if Richo didn't intentionally delay the case.....
adlithestevensonMaybe if Richo didn't intentionally delay the case.....
Nicklaus 2025-06-04 05:50 p.m.@shah Hey Dr. Khaled
Nicklaus 2025-06-06 12:30 p.m.@shah Can u write this instead of the LETI ruling
Nicklaus 2025-06-06 12:30 p.m.
Thanks
Nicklaus 2025-06-06 12:30 p.m.
or minute order deny so i can appeal
Nicklaus 2025-06-06 12:30 p.m.
Thanks
Nicklaus 2025-06-06 12:31 p.m.
im itching
shah 2025-06-06 12:31 p.m.
Stfu with your intelocutory apeal(edited)
Nicklaus 2025-06-06 12:31 p.m.
no pls rule fr
Nicklaus 2025-06-06 12:31 p.m.
its been 6 months
shah 2025-06-06 12:32 p.m.
The Court denies your Notice to Appeal
Nicklaus 2025-06-06 12:32 p.m.
I will mandamus u hoe
Nicklaus 2025-06-06 12:32 p.m.
rule!
shah 2025-06-06 12:33 p.m.
Bye this already went to mandamus and failed
shahBye this already went to mandamus and failed
Nicklaus 2025-06-06 12:34 p.m.
that was ryan
Nicklaus 2025-06-06 12:34 p.m.
can u rule pls
shah 2025-06-06 12:35 p.m.
Ugh
shah 2025-06-06 12:35 p.m.
Wheres the motion in writing again
Nicklaus 2025-06-06 12:45 p.m.
DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
https://discord.com/channels/1274202187911790632/1319397163356393614/1356087009952665762
PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
https://discord.com/channels/1274202187911790632/1319397163356393614/1368661175486775386
DEFENDANT'S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
https://discord.com/channels/1274202187911790632/1319397163356393614/1370527178512400394
https://discord.com/channels/1274202187911790632/1319397163356393614/1356087009952665762
PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
https://discord.com/channels/1274202187911790632/1319397163356393614/1368661175486775386
DEFENDANT'S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
https://discord.com/channels/1274202187911790632/1319397163356393614/1370527178512400394
shah 2025-06-06 12:45 p.m.
thank you
Nicklaus 2025-06-06 12:45 p.m.@shah
shah 2025-06-06 12:45 p.m.
ur so kind
Nicklaus 2025-06-07 07:30 p.m.@shah hows it going dr. khaled? are you putting in the work and hours
shah 2025-06-08 12:56 p.m.
did the defendant actually suffer injury in the game @Nicklaus
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:06 p.m.
NO
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:06 p.m.
I know you didn't ask me
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:06 p.m.
But he literally suffered absolutely no injury - the game didn't initiate the prompt which results in somebody having the ragdoll fall and injury to health
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:06 p.m.
He just jumped up a bit higher than normal
huddy.But he literally suffered absolutely no injury - the game didn't initiate the prompt which results in somebody having the ragdoll fall and injury to health
shah 2025-06-08 01:06 p.m.
i have confirmed that fall damage still takes place
shah 2025-06-08 01:07 p.m.
therefore that constitutes bodily harm deputy ridgevilleborn
shah 2025-06-08 01:07 p.m.
do you agree @huddy.
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:07 p.m.
Not at all
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:07 p.m.
Fall damage does not take place
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:07 p.m.
if you jump up and fall
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:07 p.m.
and face no animation
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:07 p.m.
especially at the low height that he jumped
shah 2025-06-08 01:07 p.m.
that is something ive been told by an developer
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:08 p.m.
Have you shown the developer the clip?
shah 2025-06-08 01:08 p.m.
yes
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:08 p.m.
The height and specifics on what caused the obstruction to displace him?
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:08 p.m.
Interesting
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:08 p.m.
And what was the comment?
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:08 p.m.
Definitely injury?
shah 2025-06-08 01:08 p.m.
the reason characters fling is because of roblox physics when a player touches a car
typically yes from fall damage
usually 10 hp
shah 2025-06-08 01:09 p.m.@huddy.
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:09 p.m.
Chat
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:09 p.m.
The guy didn't even land on the ground
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:09 p.m.
he jumped five studs and landed on the car
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:10 p.m.
with absolutely no animation
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:10 p.m.
there cannot be fall damage
shah 2025-06-08 01:10 p.m.
i will slow down
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:10 p.m.
Furthermore, Plaintiff didn't even cause this(edited)
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:10 p.m.
Please review the clip in detail
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:10 p.m.
Defendant stood inside his car
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:10 p.m.
so as he drove forward, Defendant was inside his bonnet
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:10 p.m.
he wasn't hit by anything, he just jumped up
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:11 p.m.
there is zero liability on Plaintiff for whatever hypothetical (impossible) damage faced by him
shah 2025-06-08 01:11 p.m.
the viudeo shows at 0:11 mr pootis steering his car and accelerating in pursuit, that in itself does not defeat your claim but i am inclined to think it caused bodily harm to the officer
shah 2025-06-08 01:11 p.m.
i dont think there is really a factual dispute here as Mr Pootis failed to yield to lawful authority and then hit an officer with his car quite clearly(edited)
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:12 p.m.
How did he hit an officer with his car
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:12 p.m.
did an officer stand in front of him
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:12 p.m.
and Mr Pootis drove into him?
shah 2025-06-08 01:12 p.m.
which is still bodily harm, regardless
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:12 p.m.
Did an officer stand in front of Mr Pootis and Mr Pootis proceeded to drive into him?
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:12 p.m.
That's not what I see
shah 2025-06-08 01:13 p.m.
the officer expected him to yield, when he did not mr ridgevilleborn hit his windows, at which Mr pootis then steered towards his direction
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:13 p.m.
I see an icy road, causing Plaintiff's vehicle to drift slightly to the right, and an officer proceeding to enjoin himself with an engine and being forced to jump upwards once moving forward
shah 2025-06-08 01:13 p.m.
that is what i see as am impartial party to this case
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:13 p.m. 
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:13 p.m.
Plaintiff was literally reversing
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:13 p.m.
Clearly due to the icy conditions of the road
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:13 p.m.
this has nothign to do with him
shah 2025-06-08 01:13 p.m.
why would he reverse when there is no place
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:14 p.m.
To get closer to the officer to read his messages
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:14 p.m.
due to roblox length limitations
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:14 p.m.
his reasoning does not matter
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:14 p.m.
it wasn't to hit the officer
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:14 p.m.
the officer glitched into his engine
shah 2025-06-08 01:14 p.m.
unfortunately summary judgment is GRANTED in favour of the defendant, ridgevilleborn. written order to come soon.
@Nicklaus @goodness gracious @singhski @huddy.
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:14 p.m.
completely based on an unknown, unconfirmed 'developer'
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:14 p.m.
wonderful
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:14 p.m.
clark courts at their finest
Nicklaus 2025-06-08 01:15 p.m.
u do know desyncing and stuff is still a use of force right
Nicklaus 2025-06-08 01:15 p.m.
huddy.completely based on an unknown, unconfirmed 'developer'
shah 2025-06-08 01:15 p.m.
its also the fact that the plaintiff steered towards mr. born's direction and then caused him bodily harm
shah 2025-06-08 01:15 p.m.
regardless of the roblox glitch
shahits also the fact that the plaintiff steered towards mr. born's direction and then caused him bodily harm
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:16 p.m.
Oh right because there's a single piece of evidence showing that Plaintiff steered his vehicle?
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:16 p.m.
There are only two pieces of evidence - Plaintiff reversing backwards, and icy road conditions
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:16 p.m.
Ask your imaginary developer about what icy road conditions due to a wheel axle
shah 2025-06-08 01:16 p.m.
you can see that because the wheel changes direction when you press W/A/S/D
shah 2025-06-08 01:17 p.m.
see 0:10 of the video
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:17 p.m.
Really? seems to me that the back wheel stays completely straight the entire time
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:17 p.m.
yet this vehicle is a four wheel drive
Nicklaus 2025-06-08 01:17 p.m.
it doesn’t even matter if the officer got hit James
Nicklaus 2025-06-08 01:17 p.m.
shah 2025-06-08 01:17 p.m.
anyways im going to close this matter you are free to appeal whomstever desires
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:19 p.m.
We request a written ruling
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:19 p.m.
To understand the true extend of the basis on the magical developer's comments
Nicklaus 2025-06-08 01:20 p.m.
u waived ur appeal by only arguing there was a factual dispute
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:20 p.m.
Ah forgot I was talking to you
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:20 p.m.
thanks
shah 2025-06-08 01:20 p.m.
written order is coming soon but my minute entry shall suffice for a ppeal for now
shah 2025-06-08 01:22 p.m.
the court would advise your client to yield to lawful authority in future conducting an traffic stop to avoid altercations (? and then trying to purposefully desync someone)(edited)
shah 2025-06-08 01:22 p.m.
god bless
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:24 p.m.
Where the fuck did we get desyncing from
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:24 p.m.
hold on
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:24 p.m.
bros throwing around terms now
huddy. 2025-06-08 01:24 p.m.
desyncing is not swerving at -4 mph sideways on an icy road into a stationary individual
Nicklaus 2025-06-08 01:24 p.m.
r u saying the plaintiff wasn’t operating his vehicle with due care given the road conditions
huddy. 2025-06-08 02:34 p.m.
Hmm let's see
huddy. 2025-06-08 02:34 p.m.
Do you possess the ability to read?
huddy. 2025-06-08 02:34 p.m.
Clearly not
shah used /transcript
clerkFlow Bot2025-06-10 05:40 p.m.
Creating transcript..
clerkFlow Bot2025-06-10 05:40 p.m.
https://discord.com/channels/1274202187911790632/1329678726383927409/1382112334537035858 Successfully created transcript.
clerkFlow Bot2025-06-10 05:41 p.m.
https://discord.com/channels/1274202187911790632/1329678726383927409/1382112337829560470 Successfully created transcript.
Exported 893 messages